Dr. Amina Wadud

Finally! I real entry!

This has been sort of a big deal in some of the LJ communities I frequent (although this is a little late). For anyone living under a rock, I'm talking about Dr. Amina Wadud leading the friday juma'a prayer, the first female to do it publicly. Most muslims I've talked to have been against it, with one exception. One female on LJ "debated" me on the topic. I put debated in quotes because she didn't really debate anything. Saying someone was in a debate implies they put forth an argument backed up by sources, and refuted the counter argument. She did no such thing. Her basic argument was, "It's right cause I like it." Her refutation of my counter-argument (which was backed up with sources) was, "Why are you being such an extremist?"

Obviously I lost the debate.

What I kept trying to get across was that, it's not my opinion I'm talking about here, it's the position of Ahl al-Sunnah. When I converted to Islam, I recognized it as truth, as something from God, so if I have opinion A, and Islam has opinion B, which contradicts my opinion, I discard opinion A for opinion B. Previously, as a secular humanist liberal American, I would have been like most everyone else, "All right! Way to go Dr.. Wadud, tell those sexists how it is!"
However, that's not that case. And that position reflects the i-word of our age (no, not iMac, information or internet): ignorance (it's funny how in a day where information is at such ready access that ignorance is so prevalent... maybe it is precisely because is much information is readily available).
See, my point is, it's not an issue of gender equality--the definition of gender equality in Islam is not the western definition, and our positions are not created by the standard of American liberalism. We derive our positions on the Qur'an and Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings upon him), as interpreted by our rightly guided scholars (another contentious issue these days). That women haven't been allowed to lead the prayer has nothing to do with whether or not they're inferior (the notion of women as "the weaker sex" is not an islamic ideal, as I understand it). It's like that because the Prophet (peace and blessings upon him) prohibited it (minus certain situations where women lead only women, but there's a difference of opinion).

The question we as muslims must ask about these issue is not, "What do I think?" but "Did the Prophet sanction it?" To borrow from the Christians, "What would Muhammad do?"

My favorite response to this whole ordeal came from Imam Zaid Shakir of the Zaytuna Institute, during the test-day session of his "40 Hadith of Imam Nawawi" class, given at Zaytuna and streamed over the internet. I transcribed what he said to the best of my ability and printed it below. Keep in mind that the following is not an article or prepared remarks, but basically Imam Zaid speaking off-the-cuff during a short Q&A session. I'm guessing the question was something like, "Is this going to happen?" judging from how his answer begins.

Disclaimer: I did this because I thought the remark was very thoughtful, and knew there would be many that would (and did) benefit from it. If anyone from Zaytuna or that knows Imam Zaid strolls across this and thinks I should remove it, I will.

His response begins at 21:27

"The reason this is going to happen is cause we're in America. That's why it's going to happen. In other words, you pay your money, you rent the hall, and you do what you want to do. This is America.
And another reason this is going to happen is because we're in America and there's no formal religious authority, then people make themselves into authorities, and as a result do what they want to do. So that's why it's happening. But is it right? It's not right and it's not proper. In the tradition ahl-e-as-Sunnah [other traditions listed which I'm unfamiliar with, so I can't type them correctly]... so from the dominant islamic traditions isn't not something that's sanctioned. The proofs and discussions of that are many. And I would say that the way it's being conducted, it wouldn't be permissible for a man to do what this lady's doing. Because it's an expression of an unrestrained nafs. Is it appropriate for a muslim, male or female, to say "I should have the right to lead the juma'a. I'm going to put myself forward over the believers." That's too much nafs, and that's a public position. And one of the basic principles on public positions is what? Whoever desires a public position is forbidden from holding it.

If any man did that in a place where there is islamic authority, he would be told, "We don't care what you want to do. You need to go to the back row and humble yourself for a few years before you put yourself up before the muslims." But from the shari'ah point of view there are a lot of issues, and insha'allah we are going to have something up on the Zaytuna Website in a few days with the nuances associated with the legal matters. But just from the point of appropriateness for a muslim in general. It's not anything the Prophet (sallalahu alaihe wa sallam) ever sanctioned.

There's a hadith of Umm Waraqah, and from the position of ahl-e-as-Sunnah the hadith is da'if. There is a weak narrator in the chain, and there's an unknown. So that hadith, based on that narration is not suitable for a proof. It's in Abu Dawood. The hadith says that Umm Waraqah was given permission to lead the people of her house. [arabic, I think it means, "people of the houseould. Something like Ahl e-bayt, but not exactly that] And there's no indication that there were men in that congregation she was given permission to lead. [arabic, same as before] And the Prophet (sallalahu alaihe wa sallam) told her to appoint a man to call the adhan for her, which indicated they might have all been women. We don't know. So there are a lot of nuances. Also the hadith would be weak, contradicted by other hadiths that are sound which say a woman shouldn't lead a group in prayer. Also, in terms of going before the men as an imam, the hanafi school doesn't allow the group prayer at all for w omen. They pray individually. And the other three schools don't permit the woman leading a group of women to go in front of them, she stands in the middle of the row equal with everyone else. So on what basis do we put the woman in front of not only the women, but the men, when the prophet told her to stand in the middle of the row? So there are a lot of things.

The issue of the juma'a is considered part of the prayer. [arabic--can't transliterate, possibly Qur'an] This is the khutbah and the prayer, so it is all considered salah. And in salah the men can speak and say subhan'Allah, but the women are told to clap their hands to alert the imam and not to raise their voices. So there are a lot of issue to be looked at. And then the people advocating this, they have their proofs, so the specific refutation of those has to be known, so insha'Allah we're gonna put our piece out and people can consider the merits of the argument against such a thing.

But it also comes to a thing when, what is most appropriate at the time? In other words, at a time where islam is generally being attacked from all angles, is it appropriate even if you feel, or if you have a right, to pursue your right if it means further and deep cleaviges within the muslim community at a time of fitnah? Or should one pull back and wait for a more appropriate time under more appropriate circumstances?
And it's a fitnah, it's a fitnah. Why is it a fitnah? People are confused. You know, "Is this right?" or "She can do it, what proof do you have to stop her?" Muslims are fighting and arguing, Muslims are pulling away from each other. "We don't need these masjids, they're all backwards and reactionary. We'll make a new progressive Islam." So it's a fitnah, and during a fitnah, the one who walks towards it is better than the one who runs towards it. The one who creeps towards it is better than the one who walks towards it. The one who remains seated is better than the one who stands. Et cetera. So one should not hasten to get wrapped up in these turmoils, because no good will come of it, no good.
For women, I mean what will happen to the sisters? Things are improving in the masajid. Things are improving. It might not be as fast as some like, but things are improving. But what's gonna happen? The conservatives are going to circle the wagon, go on the defensive and clamp down. And people are are considered extreme are going to go to another extreme, and you're going to have a deep cleavege in the muslim community. And under those circumstances... so husbands are realizing, "I'm in america, I'm not in a village in Uzbekistan, so I should ease up a little." What's he gonna do? "I don't want you listening to those people. I don't want you going..." So it's going to create a conservative backlash on the one hand, and more confusion on the other hand. So ask Allah for well being. Ask Allah for well being.

Response ends at 29:50.

I was also debated over the idea of following scholars, but that's for another entry.

the media

Police Search for Answers in Wisconsin Shooting

If a muslim did this at a mosque, Islam would be blamed. Not only that, but the fact that the man is a muslim would have been mentioned in the headline as well. Of course, since in this article, the man was a christian and not a muslim, it's not really mentioned all that much.

Seriously. If he was a muslim, the headline "Police Search for Answers in Wisconsin Shooting" would turn into something like, "Police Look For Answers in Muslim Shooting." Small change, big difference.